Tobias Scheer CNRS 6039, Université de Nice [email protected]

IWoBA Opava 7-10 July 2009

this handout and some of the references quoted at www.unice.fr/dsl/tobias.htm

HOME-MADE WESTERN SLAVIC VOWEL LENGTH (1)

purpose a. to show that Western Slavic quantity alternations in inflectional and derivational paradigms is home-made. b. quantity in lexically stored base forms may be due to diachronic developments based on Common Slavic (CS). But even here it may be doubted that modern quantity may be predicted from CS. c. quantity in inflectional and derivational paradigms it is the result of a synchronic regularity and has got nothing to do with CS quantity, intonation or stress. [synchronic means "when speakers produce inflected or derived forms from base forms in the course of grammatical derivation". This derivation may have taken place some centuries ago] d. the nature of the regularity that governs quantity in inflectional and derivational paradigms is templatic in the Semitic sense. A template is an invariable amount of (vocalic and consonantal) space that is associated to a morpho-semantic category. Example: an iterative weighs exactly 3 moras in Czech.

1. Quantity alternations in inflectional and derivational paradigms (2)

what is a template? a. a notion known from Semitic grammar b. templates enforce an association of a given morpho-semantic category with a certain consonantal and/or vocalic volume. c. example: 1. a Classical Arabic Root is made of at least three consonants 2. regular instantiation: triliterals, e.g. √ktb ==> katab3. weak verbs = biliterals, one consonant short lexically: a consonant is added - either by duplicating C2: √md ==> madad- or by inserting a glide: √rm ==> ramay4. McCarthy (1979): Template Satisfaction Principle

-2(3)

typological situation a. traditionally, templatic structure is thought of as a typological feature of Semitic (or Afro-Asiatic) b. but templatic activity has also been identified in Indo-European languages: - Portuguese (Carvalho, 2004) - German (Bendjaballah & Haiden 2003 a,b) - Czech (below)

(4)

templatic activity in Czech a. Czech appears to accommodate many templatic categories b. constraints are only vocalic, i.e. they concern only the vocalic volume (never the consonantal volume) c. unlike in Semitic, templates are never a morpheme

(5)

example: iteratives a. counting currency: morae - short V = 1 mora - syllabic consonant = 1 mora - long vowel = 2 moras b. templatic restriction: iteratives must weigh exactly three morae [acute accent (or a little round on the ů) notes vowel length] 1. iterative lengthening non-iterative iterative gloss sadit sázet plant skočit skákat jump 2. iterative shortening non-iterative iterative gloss cítit -cit'ovat feel výšit -vyšovat elevate c. critical observation - iterative lengthening always occurs in class 3 (thV=e) and 5 (thV=a) - iterative shortening always occurs in class 6 (thV=ova) [- iteratives can only be made in these three classes] d. hence - lengthening occurs with short thematic elements - shortening occurs with long thematic elements ==> both conspire to a constant weight of 3μ for iteratives

(6)

verbal classes in Czech thematic class element 1 athem. zero 2 -ou3 -e-ĕ4 -i5 -a6 -ova-

example

gloss

nés-ø-t tiskn-ou-t lež-e-t vid-ĕ-t pros-i-t dĕl-a-t kup-ova-t

porter imprimer être allongé voir prier faire acheter

-3-

(7)

corpus of 247 non-iterative - iterative pairs [full corpus see appendix] classification according to the three classes that can accommodate iteratives (classes 3, 5, 6) non-iteratives iteratives X→3 X → 5 X → 6 example → VV 49 sadit - sázet — 0 — short → VV 55 skočit - skákat stems — 13 sedĕt - sedat CVC → VV 0 — — 58 čistit - čist'ovat →V 2 vrátit - vracet — 3 hlásit - ohlášet long →V 4 šlápnout - šlapat stems — 7 mávnout - mávat CVVC →V 56 cítit - cit'ovat — 0 — 54 79 114 Total 247

(8)

iteratives obeying the 3-mora template: 228 out of 247, that is 92,3% non-iterative X→3 2μ sad-it 3μ hlás-it X→5 2μ skoč-it 4μ mávn-out X→6 3μ cít-it 2μ čist-it

(9)

iterative 2μ saz-et 3μ ohláš-et 2μ skak-at 3μ máv-at 4μ cít'-ovat 3μ čist'-ovat

iterative = 3μ lengthening sáz-et — id. lengthening skák-at — id. shortening cit'-ovat — id.

nb 49 3 55 7 56 58 228

couter-examples: iteratives disobeying the 3-mora template: 19 out of 247, that is 7,7% X→3 X→5 X→6

non-iterative 2μ CVC-Vt 3μ vrát-it 2μ sed-ĕt 4μ šlápn-out 2μ CVC-it 3μ CVVC-it

iterative = iterative 2μ or 4μ 2μ CVC-et — CVC-Vt 3μ vrác-et shortening vrac-et 2μ sed-at — id. 3μ šláp-at shortening šlap-at 3μ CVC-ovat lengthening CVVC-ovat 4μ CVVC-ovat — CVVC-ovat

nb 0 2 13 4 0 0 19

-4(10) fossilized iterative pairs without synchronic iterative relationship a. CVC with lengthening base "iterative" gloss base gloss "iterative" hledĕt hlídat regarder garder, surveiller kalit kálet troubler, brouiller, tremper souiller, déféquer, évacuer l'acier les excréments kazit pře-kážet gâter, abîmer, détraquer entraver, gêner, embarrasser, encombrer kulit koulet rouler rouler ležet léhat être couché coucher d'habitude, aimer coucher patřit arch pátrat regarder "patřit tváří tvář enquêter, rechercher smrti" affronter la mort b. CVC without lengthening base "iterative" gloss base gloss "iterative" mihnout se mizet traverser en vitesse disparaître chybit chybĕt commettre une faute/ manquer, faire défaut erreur, se tromper stavit stavĕt arrêter, inhiber, constiper s'arrêter (11) fossilization, i.e. disruption of the synchronic derivational relation, relieves from the 3-mora constraint a. 3 out of 9 items, i.e. those under (10)b, should lengthen were they obeying the 3-mora constraint. b. semantic iterative relationship, obeying vs. disobeying: 92% - 8% no semantic iterative relationship, obeying vs. disobeying: 66% - 33% (12) Czech templatic categories studied a. general Scheer (2001b, 2003, 2004a,b) b. iteratives Scheer (2003, 2004a,b) c. infinitives Caha & Scheer (2008) d. infinitive vs. supinum in Old Cezch Ziková & Karlík (2009) e. hypocoristics, -ař/-ář Bethin (2003) f. V-final prefixes Scheer (2001a)

-5(13)other templatic categories in Czech category scope of the templatic subject to a template weight templatic restriction iteratives diminutives comparative adj. –ší comparative adv. –ĕ V-final prefixes žena declension infinitives

root + thematic element root + diminutive suffix

category with templatic restriction sázet exactly 3μ chvalovat vláček exactly 3μ kyblík

sadit

exactly 3μ

dráze blíže V-final prefix zá-pad + root if the zá-točka exactly 3μ first suffix is za-táčka nominal root + case blanám, marker blanách, max 3μ blanami (pref) + root + znáti them element exactly 3μ plakati + ti

chválit

non-it. non-it.

kýbl

non-dim non-dim

blízký

adj

vlak

bližší

root + ší root + ĕ

example related (base) form without templatic restriction short long

drahý bližší za-padnout za-točit

adj comp adj verb verb za-táčet verb blána

NOMsg

pláču

past act. part.

znal

1st sg

(14) diachronic evidence: infinitive vs. supinum in Old Czech (Ziková & Karlík 2009) a. infinitives are templatic: 3 moras (counting the -i) morpheme: -t znát - po-znat, zna-l b. supina are not templatic morpheme: -t c. compare short roots in 1. the infinitive: pí-t, plou-t, sp-á-t, br-á-t, ml-í-t 2. in the supinum: pi-t, plu-t, sp-a-t, br-a-t, ml-e-t d. OCz CLC (consonant-liquid-consonant) 1. L is syllabic if a yer preceded, i.e. < Cь/ъLC 2. L is trapped (=non-syllabic, cf. Mod. Pol. trwać) if a yer followed, i.e. < CLь/ъC e. example syllabic vs. trapped in Old Czech syllabic "hold" trapped "tremble, shake" CS dьržati drъžati Polish dzierżyć drżeć Russian deržat' drožat' Old Czech držĕti držĕti Modern Czech držet —

-6dr1žĕti = 3 syllables 1

2 3 4 5 6

7 8

to jmĕ drzal takým kmenem

Kat. verse 24

držĕti = 2 syllables 1

2

3 4

5

6 7 8

všecko pohanstvo drzezalo

Kat. verse 2803

f. prediction for infinitives: in order to meet the 3-more requirement, the thematic vowel of CLC stems - must lengthen if L is trapped = < CLь/ъC - does not need to lengthen if L is syllabic = < Cь/ъLC g. true: plv-á-ti < plьv slz-ie-ti < slъz krst-í-ti < krьst vs. mlč-e-ti < mьlč h. later on, all trapped consonants became syllabic Modern Czech (except wordinitially and ř: lžíce, křtít). Consequence: a mora was added, so the thematic vowel had to shorten: OCz slzi-e-ti > MCz slz-e-ti OCz plv-á-ti > MCz pliv-a-ti

2. There is no diachronic relationship between derived forms (15) there is no diachronic relationship between CS and modern derived forms Common Salvic

lexical entry (base form)

synchronic derivation

derived category (e.g. iterative)

synchronic derivation

derived category (e.g. iterative)

diachronic evolution Czech

lexical entry (base form)

(16) synchronic and diachronic relations a. derived categories are not stored in the lexicon (excpet when fossilized, cf. above, with semantic drift) b. derived catagories are the result of online (synchronic) grammatical activity c. only lexically stored items are subject to diachronic evolution d. ==> there is no point in comparing CS iteratives with Czech iteratives: the latter are not derived from the former through diachronic evolution

-7-

3. Quantity in (lexically recorded) base forms: diachronically predictable? (17) reconstructed CS intonation: acute vs. circumflex 1 based on the evidence of a. Eastern Slavic stress b. Serbo-Croatian quantity, stress and tone c. Balic prosody (18) CS input: short stressed root-vowel followed by a liquid-obstruent cluster plus a yer ==> Czech quantity is predictable CS Serbo-Croatian Russian Czech *morzъ moróz mráz mra%z *gorchъ goróch hrách gra%ch vs. *golsъ glâs gólos hlas *bergъ sloven. brêg béreg břeh (19) Following the same method, Jagić (1894) establishes three laws concerning the reflexes of CS long vowels in Czech. Jagić' Laws 1. a CS tonic long vowel remains long if its intonation is acute 2. a CS tonic long vowel is shortened if its intonation is circumflex 3. a CS pretonic long vowel remains long whatever the intonation of the following tonic vowel (20) regularity of laws 1 and 2 tested by Trávníček (1921a,b) [the comparatistic situation for Czech is far more complex than what is reported in Halle (2001, especially note 15)] a. law 1 total of 28 words with a CS tonic long root-vowel that bore acute intonation and therefore should come out with a long vowel in Czech. Result: 1. are long: 9 (obey law 1) cíp, dým, dřík, klín, pláč, ráj, sýr, stír, týn 2. are short: 13 (disobey law 1) bratr, čas, dĕd, had, hnĕv, jih, kraj, laz (Lazy), pluh, rak, rys, smĕr, (staro)svat 3. are long in Nsg, but short in oblique cases: 6 Nsg hrách - Gsg hrachu; chléb, mák, mráz, práh, vítr

1

The cross-Slavic evidence and the various segmental effects that are commonly related to intonation in various Slavic languages are reported in all textbooks, e.g., Carlton (1991:186ff), Garde (1976:197ff), Bethin (1998:121ff), Panzer (1991:324ff).

-8b. law 2 total of 76 words with a CS tonic long root-vowel that bore circumflex intonation and therefore should come out with a short vowel in Czech. Result: 1. are short: 67 (obey law 2) bĕh, bĕs, blesk, blud, brav, brus, břeh, cep, člen, čin, člun, dar, dluh, dub, duch, druh, hlad, hlas, hrad, hnus, chlad, chlap, jed, jek, jez, knĕz, kruh, kus, kvas, kvĕt, lep, les, lesk, luh, luk, mĕch, mlat, mrak, muž, plaz, ples, prach, prut, rub, sad, sled, sluch, smrad, stan, strach, střep, sud, svĕt, svrab, syn, trup, vaz, vĕk, vlak, vlas, vrah, (ha)vran, vřed, vřes, znak, zrak, žleb. 2. are long: 8 (disobey law 2) bloud, řád, smích, šíp, troud, vír, žár, žír 3. are long in Nsg, but short in oblique cases: 1 Nsg sníh, Gsg snĕhu (21) Metatony LEHR-SPŁAWIŃSKI (1917, 1918, 1923) a. observation: CS words which end in a yer fall foul of Jagić' predictions. b. example Gpl -ъ Slovak (and Czech): lengthening of root vowels in Gpl, i.e. before a former yer Nsg Gpl gloss žena žien woman kytica kytíc bunch (of flowers) ulica ulíc street palica palíc stick fabrika fabrík factory c. analysis 1. stressed final yers were lost 2. therefore stress had to move back into the root → stress retraction 3. stress retraction modifies the intonational pattern of the root: the two intonations are flipped around. d. metatony 1. acute > neo-circumflex / __C1-yer provokes shortening in WSl 2. circumflex > neo-acute / __C1-yer preserves original length in WSl e. effects 1. like acute, neo-acute favours length 2. like circumflex, neo-circumflex provokes shortening f. since then Czech quantity is has always been explained by metatony: for example, the neo-acute solution is promoted by Vaillant (1950:258) and Carlton (1991:186ff). Only Šaur (1995) calls the intonational conditioning of Czech vowel length into question.

-9-

4. Application of metatony to inflected/derived forms 4.1. Application to the Genitive plural of feminine a-stems (22) metatony is flawed I a. metatony should only apply to stressed final yers: there is no stress retraction in case of unstressed final yers, hence there should be no modification of intonation. b. this is not the case: CS stress is entirely irrelevant for Western Slavic lengthening in Genitive plural. c. other yer-final categories are worked through in the literature: e.g., Shevelov 1964:534ff, Garde 1976:221ff, Stang 1957:167ff, Lamprecht 1987:145ff). d. slov ruka - rúk "hand Nsg, Gpl" = rus ruká < CS Gpl * ruk-ъè slov kniha - kníh "book Nsg, Gpl" = rus kníga < CS Gpl *kníg-ъ e. way out: analyogy well… for a pattern that is completely regular and independent of stress/intonation. f. yer loss in Gpl causes lengthening of the root vowel. Interpretation e.g. by Rubach (1993:144ff) , Kavitskaya (2002): compensatory lengthening. ==> templatic interpretation: Gpl must weigh two moras (before and after the loss of yers) (23) metatony is flawed II a. Jagić' laws only concern long CS vowels. Only long vowels should be affected by metatony and the influence of neo-acute b. CS vowel length is entirely irrelevant for the Gpl paradigm, e.g. Old Czech voda - vód "water Nsg, Gpl". c. here again, the metatony interpretation is maintained, and analogy invoked (e.g. Garde 1976:223). 4.2. Application to diminutives in -ek (24) Garde (1976:211ff) shows for various paradigms that there is no relation between Czech quantity and Eastern/ Southern Slavic stress and intonation. [Against Pedersen (1905:320) who tries to derive the diminutive pattern from CS intonation.]

- 10 (25) example: diminutives in -ek a. vlak - vláč-ek most - můst-ek etc. b. rus. root- vs. suffix stress tráv-ka Nsg < CS *tráv-ъk-a vs. golos-ká Gsg < CS *gols-ъèk-a c when yers fell out, there should have been stress retraction in CS *gols-ъèk-a d. however, there is no corresponding effect in length in Czech: trávka, hlásek "grass dim., voice dim." e. Garde (1976:226) concludes that "stress has never moved in these forms" in Czech. f. instead of concluding that stress is irrelevant: Czech has diminutive lengthening: diminutives must weigh at least three moras. had - hád-ek dřevo - dřív-k-o kniha - kníž-k-a jung individual: had - hád-ĕ dĕti - dít-ĕ medvĕd - medvíd-ĕ kozel - kůzl-e sova - sův-ĕ vnuk - vnouč-e

5. Conclusion (26) metatony is out of business: it is discredited since the 50s (at least for explaining Western Slavic quantity, maybe altogether) a. all older work (i.e. until the late 50's) that has been done in this field shares the fundamental assumption that Western Slavic quantity exclusively depends on CS intonation and its various subsequent modifications embodied by LehrSpławiński's metatony or versions thereof. Trávníček (1912,1921a,b,c,1925,1935:249ff), Černý (1897-1900), Pedersen (1905), Sedláček (1910), van Wijk (1922,1958), Belić (1928), Komárek (1962:73ff,82ff), Vážný (1963:59f), Lamprecht et al. (1986:79f), Carlton (1991:186ff), Bulachovskij (1953). Only Šaur (1995) takes exception. b. in more recent work, the scope of metatony has been substantially depleted: if in earlier times almost any prosodic or quantitative variation was blindly ascribed to some metatony of variable definition, it has become clear that many of the alternations at stake are language-specific and entirely unrelated to intonation in general and to metatony in particular. This is the result of work by Kuryłowicz (1952,1968), Stang (1957), Sadnik (1959), Nonnemacher-Pribić (1961), Shevelov (1964:563f), Kortlandt (1975) and others.

- 11 c. some voices such as Stang (1957:21) and Garde (1976:IX) for example deny the existence of metatony in Slavic altogether. d. overviews of the post-war development: Bethin (1998:121), Kortlandt (1978a,b), Garde (1976), Lunt (1963). (27) conclusion on Western Slavic quantity a. inflected/derived forms: 1. many (but not all) quantity alternations are due to synchronic templatic activity 2. at least in Czech – other WSl languages need to be looked at; Slovak seems to work along the same lines b. in base forms: maybe quantity can be predicted from CS forms, but attempts to date strike quite far from the mark. c. dialectal (i.e. non-normalized) evidence may help to establish diachronic regularities.

Appendix: 247 non-iterative - iterative pairs (1)

X > 3 -et, -ĕt a. short stems: CVC 1. regular: iterative lengthening derivation 1>3 2>3 3>3 4>3

alternation i-í i-í e-í o-á a-á e-í ĕ-í i-í o-á u-ou y-ý

simple pít minout hledĕt vonĕt sadit jezdit dĕlit klidit hodit pustit myslit

iterative píjet míjet -hlížet -vánĕt sázet -jíždĕt -dílet -klízet házet pouštĕt -mýšlet

number 3 1 1 1 10 2 1 1 22 6 1 49

2. contravening: no iterative lengthening no known cases X > 3 -et, -ĕt b. long stems: CVVC 1. regular: no iterative shortening derivation alternation simple 2>3 í-í -bídnout 4>3 á-á hlásit ou-ou trousit

iterative -bízet -hlášet -troušet

number 1 1 1 3

iterative vracet -svĕcet

number 1 1 2

2. contravening: iterative shortening derivation alternation simple 4>3 á-a vrátit í-i svítit

- 12 (2)

X > 5 -at a. short stems: CVC 1. regular: iterative lengthening derivation alternation simple 1>5 e-é lézt e-í mést o-á moci ø-í dřít 2>5 i-í všimnout si y-ý poskytnout e-í zapomenout e-ý vyslechnout a-á chladnout o-á -hodnout e-ou poslechnout ø-í pnout 2/3>5 e-é lehnout, ležet 3>5 e-é letĕt i-í vidĕt ĕ-í bĕžet y-ý slyšet 4>5 o-á skočit u-ou mluvit 5>5 ø-í -slat

iterative -lézat -mítat -máhat -dírat všímat si poskýtat zapomínat vyslýchat -chládat hádat poslouchat -pínat léhat létat vídat -bíhat slýchat skákat -mlouvat -sílat

number 3 1 1 10 6 2 6 1 2 1 1 10 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 55

2. contravening: no iterative lengthening derivation alternation simple 2>5 a-a padnout i-i plivnout y-y chytnout e-e seknout ĕ-ĕ bĕžet o-o bodnout u-u puknout

iterative padat plivat chytat sekat bĕhat bodat pukat

number 2 1 1 5 1 2 1 13

iterative -tloukat -růstat lízat mávat

number 1 1 2 3 7

iterative sahat řezat šlapat

number 1 1 2 4

X > 5 -at b. long stems: CVVC 1. regular: no iterative shortening derivation alternation simple 1>5 ou-ou tlouci ů-ů růst 2>5 í-í líznout á-á mávnout

2. contravening: iterative shortening derivation alternation simple 2>5 á-a sáhnout í-e říznout á-a šlápnout

- 13 (3)

X > 6 -ovat a. long stems: CVVC 1. regular: iterative shortening derivation alternation simple 2>6 á-a -přáhnout í-i líznout í-e říznout ý-y dýchnout 2/4> 6 ou-u stoupnout, -st oupit 3>6 á-a sázet 4>6 á-a chválit í-i stínit í-ĕ navštívit ou-u -loučit ú-u úžit ý-y výšit 5>6 á-a skákat

iterative -přahovat -lizovat -řezovat -dychovat -stupovat

number 4 2 1 1 1

-sazovat -chvalovat -stiňovat navštĕvovat -lučovat zužovat -vyšovat -skakovat

3 11 10 1 14 1 4 5 58

2. contravening: no iterative shortening no known cases X > 6 -ovat b. short stems: CVC 1. regular: no iterative lengthening derivation alternation simple 1>6 i-i řinout se e-e dechnout ø-y hnout 2/3> 6 i-i křiknout, křičet 2/4> 6 y-y chytnout, chytit 4>6 a-a tlačit e-e černit ĕ-ĕ mĕřit i-i čistit o-o hostit o-a lomit u-u ručit y-y sytit

iterative -řinovat se -dechovat -hybovat -křikovat

number 3 1 1 1

-chycovat

1

-tlačovat -čerňovat -mĕřovat -čist'ovat -hošt'ovat -lamovat -ručovat -sycovat

15 7 4 6 9 1 3 4 56

2. contravening: iterative lengthening no known cases

References References followed by WEB are available at www.unice.fr/dsl/tobias.htm. Belić, Alexander 1928. Zur westslavischen Akzentlehre. Zeitschrift für Slavische Philologie 5: 146-152. Bendjaballah, Sabrina & Martin Haiden 2003. Meaningful vowels. Proceedings of the XXVIII Incontro di Grammatica Generativa, edited by Piero Bottari. Lecce: Congedo Editore.

- 14 Bendjaballah, Sabrina & Martin Haiden 2003. Templatic Inflection in German. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics 8: 29-41. Bethin, Christina 1998. Slavic Prosody. Language change and phonological theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bethin, Christina 2003. Metrical Quantity in Czech: Evidence From Hypocoristics. Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 11: The Amherst Meeting, edited by W. Browne, B. Partee & R. Rothstein, 63-82. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications. Bulachovskij, L. A. 1953. Akcentologi českij kommentarij k češskomu jazyku. Vypusk I: Obščie javlenija. Kiev: Izdatel'stvo kyjivskogo universiteta. Caha, Pavel & Tobias Scheer 2008. The Syntax and Phonology of Czech Templatic Morphology. Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics. The Stony Brook Meeting 2007, edited by Andrei Antoneko, John Bailyn & Christina Bethin, 68-83. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications. WEB. Carlton, Terence 1991. Introduction to the phonological history of the Slavic languages. Columbus, Ohio: Slavica. Carvalho, Joaquim Brandão de 2004. Templatic morphology in the Portuguese verb. Nouveaux départs en phonologie : les conceptions sub- et suprasegmentales, edited by Trudel Meisenburg & Maria Selig, 13-32. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. Černý, Fr. 1897-1900. Studie o české kvantitĕ. Listy Filologické 24+27: 24: 343-354, 421431; 27: 17-22. Garde, Paul 1976. Histoire de l'accentuation slave. 2 vols, Paris: Institut d'Etudes Slaves. Halle, Morris 2001. On accent, stress and quantity in West Slavic. Lingua 111: 791-810. Jagić, Vatroslav 1894. Mitteilungen zur Wiener Philologenversammlung. Anzeiger für indogermanische Sprach- und Altertumskunde 3: 251-254. Kavitskaya, Darya 2002. Compensatory Lengthening. Phonetics, Phonology, Diachrony. New York & London: Routledge. Komárek, Miroslav 1969. Historická mluvnice Česká. Volume I: Hláskosloví. Praha: SPN. Kortlandt, Frederik 1975. Slavic Accentuation: a Study in Relative Chronology. Lisse: de Ridder. Kortlandt, Frederik 1978a. On the history of Slavic accentuation. Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung 92: 269-281. Kortlandt, Frederik 1978b. Review of Garde, Paul: A history of Slavic accentuation. Lingua 44: 67-91. Kuryłowicz, Jerzy 1952. L'accentuation des langues indo-européennes. 2nd edition Wrocław 1958: Ossolineum. Kuryłowicz, Jerzy 1968. Indogermanische Grammatik, Band II: Akzent, Ablaut. Heidelberg: Carl Winter. Lamprecht, Arnošt 1987. Praslovanština. Brno: Univerzita Purkynĕ. Lamprecht, Arnošt, Dušan Šlosar & Jaroslav Bauer 1986. Historická mluvnice Češtiny. Praha: SPN. Lehr-Spławiński, Tadeusz 1917. Ze studjów nad akcentem słowiańskim. Kraków: Akademie Umiejętości. Lehr-Spławiński, Tadeusz 1918. O prasłowiańskiej metatonyi. Prace Komisji język. Akad. Umiejętności w Krakowie 2: 18-24. Lehr-Spławiński, Tadeusz 1923. De la stabilisation de l'accent dans les langues slaves de l'Ouest. Revue des Etudes Slaves 3: 173-192. Lunt, Horace 1963. On the study of Slavic accentuation. Word 19: 82-99. McCarthy, John 1979. Formal problems in Semitic phonology and morphology. Ph.D dissertation, MIT. Nonnemacher-Pribić, Elisabeth 1961. Die baltoslavischen Akzentund

- 15 Intonationsverhältnisse und ihr quantitativer Reflex im Slovakischen. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Panzer, Baldur 1991. Die Slavischen Sprachen in Gegenwart und Geschichte. Sprachstrukturen und Verwandtschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Pedersen, Holger 1905. Die nasalpräsentia und der slavische akzent. Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung 38: 297-425. Rubach, Jerzy 1993. The Lexical Phonology of Slovak. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Sadnik, Linda 1959. Slavische Akzentuation. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Šaur, Vladimír 1995. K výkladu vývoje české vakalické kvantity. Pocta Dušanu Šlosarovi. Sborník k 65. narozeninám, edited by Petr Karlík, 91-96. Boskovice: Albert. Scheer, Tobias 2001a. The Rhythmic Law in Czech: Vowel-final Prefixes. Current Issues in Formal Slavic Linguistics, edited by Gerhild Zybatow, Uwe Junghans, Grit Mehlhorn & Luka Szucsich, 37-48. Frankfurt am Main: Lang. WEB. Scheer, Tobias 2001b. Čeština ve Waršawĕ. Course handout, University of Warsaw. WEB. Scheer, Tobias 2003. The Key to Czech Vowel Length: Templates. Investigations into Formal Slavic Linguistics, edited by Petr Kosta, Joanna Blaszczak, Jens Frasek, Ljudmila Geist & Marzena Żygis, 97-118. Frankfurt am Main: Lang. WEB. Scheer, Tobias 2004a. O samohláskové délce při derivaci v češtinĕ. Čeština - univerzália a specifika 5, edited by Zdeňka Hladká & Petr Karlík, 224-239. Praha: Lidové noviny. WEB. Scheer, Tobias 2004b. Le corpus heuristique : un outil qui montre mais ne démontre pas. Corpus 3: 153-192. WEB. Sedláček, František 1910. K osudu praslovanských slabik dlouhých v češtinĕ. Listy Filologické 37: 22-41. Shevelov, George 1964. A Prehistory of Slavic. The historical phonology of Common Slavic. Heidelberg: Winter. Stang, Chr. 1957. Slavonic Accentuation. Oslo: Norske Videnskaps-Akademie. Trávníček, František 1912. K otázce české kvantity za raženou intonaci praslovanských dlouhých vokálů pod přízvukem. Časopis pro moderní filologii a literatury 2: 3-9, 100-104, 196-201. Trávníček, František 1921a. Ke kvantitĕ mužských kmenů na -o-, -jo- a -u- v češtinĕ. Listy Filologické 48: 101-111. Trávníček, František 1921b. O kvantitĕ dvouslabičných aa - a jaa - kmenů s původním přízvukem na koncovce a s praslovanskými dlouhými vokály. Časopis pro moderní filologii a literatury 7: 14-18, 73-76, 150-152. Trávníček, František 1921c. De la quantité en tchèque. Revue des Etudes Slaves 1: 204-227. Trávníček, František 1925. K vývoji čes. kvantity. Sborník Prací vĕnovaných profesuro Janu Máchalovi k sedmdesátým narozeninám, edited by Jiří Horák & Miloslav Hýsek, 349357. Praha: Klub moderních filologů. Trávníček, František 1935. Historická mluvnice Československá. Praha: Melantrich. Vaillant, André 1950. Grammaire comparée des langues slaves. Tome 1: Phonétique. Paris & Lyon: Institut d'Etudes Slaves. van Wijk, Nicolaas 1922. Die aus altem Akutus entstandenen sekundären slavischen Intonationen. Indogermanische Forschungen 40: 275-293. van Wijk, Nicolaas 1958. Die baltischen und slavischen Akzent- und Intonationssysteme. 2nd edition 'S-Gravenhage: Mouton. Vážný, Václav 1963. Historická mluvnice česká. Vol. II,2: Tvarosloví, Skloňování. Praha: SPN. Ziková, Markéta & Petr Karlík 2009. Syntax a fonologie staročeského supina. Paper presented at the conference Užívání a prožívání jazyka, Prague 15 - 17 April.